Marty Rathbun needs to answer Gerry Armstrong's questions

Veda

Sponsor
Jesse Prince did not say anything either, nothing that lead to any arrests and to the demise of the very Church him, Marty and the rest helped creating. Neither him or Marty or anyone else who can give information are willing to come clean.

Didn't say anything? Not so.
 

Veda

Sponsor
I'm sure this is going to go over like a lead balloon:

I cannot find any definition of the word "need" that makes the thread title correct.

As I understand the various documents I've seen so far, Gerald Armstrong took the private personal papers of Ron Hubbard with which he was entrusted (can you say "fiduciary duty") and gave access to these materials to lawyers determined to get Hubbard for Mr. Armstrong's personal profit.

The above fact seems to be blithely glossed over by Mr. Armstrong's cheerleading section.

Furthermore, Mr. Armstrong has made numerous and repeated public accusations of criminal conduct on Mark Rathbun's part for which he did not and still does not have even the slightest factual evidence.

Nope, Mark Rathbun doesn't owe Mr. Armstrong so much as the time of day.


You're creeping me out, Mr. hall monitor "Scientologist," seriously creeping me out.

From Marty's '31 Factors':

Marty's 'Factor #11':

"Miscavige has run a continuous propaganda campaign attempting to besmirch the good name of L. Ron Hubbard. He has consistently given little interest and funds for defending public relations attacks on Hubbard."

There is little doubt that Marty Rathbun would have prefered that the FBI raids of July 1977 and the subsequent document release, by court order, in December 1979, had never happened, and also little doubt that Rathbun would have preferred that Gerry Armstrong had never been involved in the Hubbard biography project, with its unexpected consequences, in the mid 1980s, of bringing previously secret information re. Hubbard to light. Does Rathbun blame either or both of these occurrences on Miscavige?

Apparently, Rathbun does blame Miscavige for failing to prevent the publication of the three notable pre-Internet critical books about Hubbard/Scientology -

'Messiah or Madman?' 1987, 1992, 1996, (2005, in Russian by a Moscow publisher) http://www.amazon.com/reader/0942637577?_encoding=UTF&ref_=sib_dp_pt

'Bare-Faced Messiah' 1987 (also released in paperback) http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/bfm/bfmconte.htm

and 'Piece of Blue Sky' 1990 - http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/a_piece_of_blue_sky.htm

This is viewed by Rathbun as an early Miscavige screw up.

Hey Sneakster, would you also have preferred if the Scientology documents - exposed as a result of the 1977 FBI raids - had never been released for public scrutiny?

Or do you just have a thing with Gerry Armstrong?
 

Peter Soderqvist

Patron with Honors
I'm sure this is going to go over like a lead balloon:

I cannot find any definition of the word "need" that makes the thread title correct.

As I understand the various documents I've seen so far, Gerald Armstrong took the private personal papers of Ron Hubbard with which he was entrusted (can you say "fiduciary duty") and gave access to these materials to lawyers determined to get Hubbard for Mr. Armstrong's personal profit.

The above fact seems to be blithely glossed over by Mr. Armstrong's cheerleading section.

Furthermore, Mr. Armstrong has made numerous and repeated public accusations of criminal conduct on Mark Rathbun's part for which he did not and still does not have even the slightest factual evidence.

Nope, Mark Rathbun doesn't owe Mr. Armstrong so much as the time of day.

Soderqvist1: the Sneakster, what is your evidence that Gerry has stolen these papers, or is guilty to violation of fiduciary? How come that the court proceeding is about 10 thousand pages about Hubbard’s life, instead of just give these papers back to its owner? The answer is simple; Omar Garrison is the owner of these papers (it is copies, and the church has the originals), according to the contract he had with the church, and there is no restriction in the said contract what Omar Garrison could do with these copies, except that L. Ron Hubbard had the last word in the formation of L. Ron Hubbard’s Biography!

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Page: 69 –70: In the contract that Garrison has with Hubbard, there is no provision of any nature or description as to what Garrison can do with the documents. The only protective, covenant or protective or restrictive provision in the contract is that Hubbard has to give final approval to the ultimate biography.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/a1/2466.php

Page 5 – 7: From November of 1980 through 1981, Defendant Armstrong worked closely with Mr. Garrison, assembling Hubbard's archives into logical categories, copying them and arranging the copies of the Archives materials into bound volumes. Defendant Armstrong made two copies of almost all documents copied for Mr. Garrison - one for Mr. Garrison and the other to remain in Hubbard Archives for reference or recopying.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/a1/283.php

Page 13 – 14: Mr. Garrison became afraid for the security of the documents and believed that the intelligence network of the Church of Scientology would break and enter his home to retrieve them. Thus, Defendant Armstrong made copies of certain documents for Mr. Garrison and maintained them in a separate location. It was thereafter, in the summer of 1982, that Defendant Armstrong asked Mr. Garrison for copies of documents to use in his defense and sent the documents to his attorneys, Michael Flynn and Contos & Bunch.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/a1/283.php
 

Veda

Sponsor
It seems appropriate to add this excerpt from Judge Breckenridge's summation at the end of 'Armstrong vs Church of Scientology' in 1984:

"As indicated by its factual findings, the court finds the testimony of Gerald and Joycelyn Armstrong, Laurel Sullivan...Omar Garrison, Kima Douglas, and Homer Shomer to be credible, extremely persuasive... In all critical and important matters their testimony was precise, accurate and rang true...

"The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar...

"The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egotism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile.

"At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents..."
 

Freeminds

Bitter defrocked apostate
Fiduciary duty?

Whistle-blowing is always a breach of trust, in a sense... but is a person obliged to keep schtumm when they find that they have been supporting criminality? I think not. An employer can't expect or demand somebody's trust when they are behaving in a reprehensible manner.

Armstrong, Rathbun... any ongoing dispute about which of them is 'right' is a fight for a moral high-ground that simply doesn't exist. Where Scientology is involved, the high ground will always be several fathoms below sea level - and both parties' actions are a direct consequence of their involvement in Scientology.

How can we expect the officers of a cult that is "both immoral and socially obnoxious ... corrupt, sinister and dangerous" (Mr Justice Latey, High Court of London) not to act in an immoral, corrupt or obnoxious manner? Why should people working withing a "schizophrenic and paranoid" organisational culture (Judge Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court) act as anything but schizophrenic and paranoid themselves?

As Justice Anderson (Supreme Court of Victoria) said, "...its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill..."

This is Scientology. That was Hubbard. Some people realise the truth and shout it from the rooftops; others can't or won't. They can try to delude themselves of course, or try to wear the Cheapzone as a security-blanket against reality... but the truth will out. Hell, the truth is out. Marty's revisionist version of the history of the Scientology cult is a joke.

[Edit: beat me to it, Veda! :clap:]
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
I'm sure this is going to go over like a lead balloon:

I cannot find any definition of the word "need" that makes the thread title correct.

As I understand the various documents I've seen so far, Gerald Armstrong took the private personal papers of Ron Hubbard with which he was entrusted (can you say "fiduciary duty") and gave access to these materials to lawyers determined to get Hubbard for Mr. Armstrong's personal profit.

The above fact seems to be blithely glossed over by Mr. Armstrong's cheerleading section.

Furthermore, Mr. Armstrong has made numerous and repeated public accusations of criminal conduct on Mark Rathbun's part for which he did not and still does not have even the slightest factual evidence.

Nope, Mark Rathbun doesn't owe Mr. Armstrong so much as the time of day.


Your signature line reveals that you used to be the Tech Film I/C at ASHO.

I see you're still wearing your propaganda hat there Sneakster.

How are your stats here on ESMB for: "NUMBER OF TIMES PEOPLE GOT THE ERRONEOUS IMPRESSION THAT LRH AND HIS ENFORCERS WERE NOT INCORRIGIBLE LIARS" ?
 

Peter Soderqvist

Patron with Honors
I'm sure this is going to go over like a lead balloon:

I cannot find any definition of the word "need" that makes the thread title correct.

As I understand the various documents I've seen so far, Gerald Armstrong took the private personal papers of Ron Hubbard with which he was entrusted (can you say "fiduciary duty") and gave access to these materials to lawyers determined to get Hubbard for Mr. Armstrong's personal profit.

The above fact seems to be blithely glossed over by Mr. Armstrong's cheerleading section.

Furthermore, Mr. Armstrong has made numerous and repeated public accusations of criminal conduct on Mark Rathbun's part for which he did not and still does not have even the slightest factual evidence.

Nope, Mark Rathbun doesn't owe Mr. Armstrong so much as the time of day.

Soderqvist1: What you claim about Marty Rathbun’s innocence does that stand up to scrutiny?
This is what Jesse Prince has told Lawrence Wollersheim!

J: [Reading] "Anyone who was fair game or had their reputation destroyed by Scientology." The people that I know who were definitely fair game was even mentioned..

L: They actually said it within the organization, that somebody was fair game?
J: Yeah.
L: Who said?
J: Marty Rathbun, David Miscavige.
L: Who did they say was fair game?
J: Lawrence Wollersheim, Gerry Armstrong.
L: You actually heard that. What time did they say this? What year?
J: This was during the period of time where there was litigation going between these two litigates.
L: For years Scientology has been saying they cancelled the fair game, they don't do that anymore, that doesn't exist, and you actually heard them call Lawrence Wollersheim and Gerry Armstrong fair game?
J: Yep.
http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/jesse_tape_4d.html

L: Anyone else? Did you ever hear them talk? Did you ever hear them say, "Go get his PC folders and get everything out of his folders that the PI's can use"?
J: Yes.
L: Who said that to who?
J: Marty, I heard Marty Rathbun say it about you, and David Miscavige was sitting there. I heard him say it about Armstrong.
http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/jesse_tape_5e.html

Soderqvist1: yet, Marty Rathbun has said that he didn’t apply “Fare-Game, he justified his destruction of other humans with the Responsibility of Leaders policy!
http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/worse-than-fair-game/
 
T

TheSneakster

Guest
Soderqvist1: the Sneakster, what is your evidence that Gerry has stolen these papers, or is guilty to violation of fiduciary? How come that the court proceeding is about 10 thousand pages about Hubbard’s life, instead of just give these papers back to its owner? The answer is simple; Omar Garrison is the owner of these papers (it is copies, and the church has the originals), according to the contract he had with the church, and there is no restriction in the said contract what Omar Garrison could do with these copies, except that L. Ron Hubbard had the last word in the formation of L. Ron Hubbard’s Biography!

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Page: 69 –70: In the contract that Garrison has with Hubbard, there is no provision of any nature or description as to what Garrison can do with the documents. The only protective, covenant or protective or restrictive provision in the contract is that Hubbard has to give final approval to the ultimate biography.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/a1/2466.php

Page 5 – 7: From November of 1980 through 1981, Defendant Armstrong worked closely with Mr. Garrison, assembling Hubbard's archives into logical categories, copying them and arranging the copies of the Archives materials into bound volumes. Defendant Armstrong made two copies of almost all documents copied for Mr. Garrison - one for Mr. Garrison and the other to remain in Hubbard Archives for reference or recopying.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/a1/283.php

Page 13 – 14: Mr. Garrison became afraid for the security of the documents and believed that the intelligence network of the Church of Scientology would break and enter his home to retrieve them. Thus, Defendant Armstrong made copies of certain documents for Mr. Garrison and maintained them in a separate location. It was thereafter, in the summer of 1982, that Defendant Armstrong asked Mr. Garrison for copies of documents to use in his defense and sent the documents to his attorneys, Michael Flynn and Contos & Bunch.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/a1/283.php

Mr. Soderqvist:

Correction of factual errors with proper documentation is always welcomed by me.

Thank you.
 
Top